Letter 1005: Did you ever see a man more abject and fawning than Marcus Regulus has been since the death of Domitian?

To Voconius Romanus. Did you ever see a man more abject and fawning than Marcus Regulus has been since the death of Domitian? His misdeeds were better concealed during that prince's reign, but they were every bit as bad as they were in the time of Nero. He began to be afraid that I was angry with him and he was not mistaken, for I certainly was annoyed. After doing what he could to help those who were prosecuting Rusticus Arulenus, he had openly exulted at his death, and went so far as to publicly read and then publish a pamphlet in which he violently attacks Rusticus and even calls him "the Stoics' ape," adding that "he is marked with the brand of Vitellius." * You recognise, of course, the Regulian style! He tears to pieces Herennius Senecio so savagely that Metius Carus said to him, "What have you to do with my dead men? Did I ever worry your Crassus or Camerinus?" - these being some of Regulus's victims in the days of Nero. Regulus thought I bore him malice for this, and so he did not invite me when he read his pamphlet. Besides, he remembered that he once mortally attacked me in the court of the centumviri. ** I was a witness on behalf of Arionilla, the wife of Timon, at the request of Rusticus Arulenus, and Regulus was conducting the prosecution. We on our side were relying for part of the defence on a decision of Metius Modestus, an excellent man who had been banished by Domitian and was at that moment in exile. This was Regulus's opportunity. "Tell me, Secundus," said he, "what you think of Modestus." You see in what peril I should have placed myself if I had answered that I thought highly of him, and how disgraceful it would have been if I had said that I thought ill of him. I fancy it must have been the gods who came to my rescue. "I will tell you what I think of him," I said, "when the Court has to give a decision on the point." He returned to the charge: "My question is, what do you think of Modestus?" Again I replied: "Witnesses used to be interrogated about persons in the dock, not about those who are already convicted." A third time he asked: "Well, I won't ask you now what you think of Modestus, but what you think of his loyalty." "You ask me," said I, "for my opinion. But I do not think it is in order for you to ask an opinion on what the Court has already passed judgment." He was silenced, while I was congratulated and praised for not having smirched my reputation by giving an answer that might have been discreet but would certainly have been dishonest, and for not having entangled myself in the meshes of such a crafty question. Well, now the fellow is conscience-stricken, and buttonholes first Caecilius Celer and then implores Fabius Justus to reconcile me to him. Not content with that, he makes his way in to see Spurinna, and begs and prays of him - you know what an abject coward he is when he is frightened - as follows. "Do go," says he, "and call on Pliny in the morning - early in the morning, for my suspense is unbearable - and do what you can to remove his anger against me." I was early awake that day, when a message came from Spurinna, "I am coming to see you." I sent back word, "I will come and see you." We met at the portico of Livia, just as we were each of us on the way to see the other. He explained his commission from Regulus and added his own entreaties, but did not press the point too strongly, as became a worthy gentleman asking a favour for a worthless acquaintance. This was my answer: "Well, you must see for yourself what message you think best to take back to Regulus; I should not like you to be under any misapprehension. I am waiting till Mauricus † returns" - he had not yet returned from exile - "and so I cannot give you an answer either way, for I will do just what he thinks best. It is he who is principally interested in this matter, I am only secondarily concerned." A few days afterwards Regulus himself met me when I was paying my respects to the new praetor. He followed me thither and asked for a private conversation. He said he was afraid that something he once said in the court of the centumviri rankled in my memory, when, in replying to Satrius Rufus and myself, he remarked, "Satrius Rufus, who is quite content with the eloquence of our days, and does not seek to rival Cicero." I told him that as I had his own confession for it I could now see that the remark was a spiteful one, but that it was quite possible to put a complimentary construction upon it. "For," said I, "I do try to rival Cicero, and I am not content with the eloquence of our own time. I think it is very stupid not to take as models the very best masters. But how is it that you remember this case and forget the other one in which you asked me what I thought of the loyalty of Metius Modestus?" As you know, he is always pale, but he grew perceptibly paler at this thrust. Then he stammered out, "I put the question not to damage you but Modestus." Observe the man's malignant nature who does not mind acknowledging that he wished to do an injury to an exile. Then he went on to make this fine excuse; "He wrote in a letter which was read aloud in Domitian's presence, 'Regulus is the vilest creature that walks on two legs.'" Modestus never wrote a truer word. That practically closed the conversation. I did not wish it to go any further, so that I might not commit myself until Mauricus arrived. Moreover, I am quite aware that Regulus is a difficult bird to net. He is rich, he is a shrewd intriguer, he has no inconsiderable body of followers and a still larger circle of those who fear him, and fear is often a more powerful factor than affection. But, after all, these are bonds that may be shattered and weakened, for a bad man's influence is as little to be relied upon as is the man himself. Moreover, let me repeat that I am waiting for Mauricus. He is a man of sound judgment and sagacity, which he has learned by experience, and he can gauge what is likely to happen in the future from what has occurred in the past. I will be guided by him, and either strike a blow or set aside my weapons just as he thinks best. I have written you this letter because it is only right, considering our regard for one another, that you should be acquainted not only with what I have said and done, but also with my plans for the future. Farewell. [Note: This refers to a wound he had received while supporting Vitellius. - Tacitus, Hist. iii. 80. ] [Note: A college of about one hundred judges, as the name implies, divided into Chambers or Courts. It will be found frequently mentioned in these letters. ] (†) The brother of Arulenus Rusticus.

L To Voconius Romanus. Did you ever see a man more abject and fawning than Marcus Regulus has been since the death of Domitian? His misdeeds were better concealed during that prince's reign, but they were every bit as bad as they were in the time of Nero. He began to be afraid that I was angry with him and he was not mistaken, for I certainly was annoyed. After doing what he could to help those who were prosecuting Rusticus Arulenus, he had openly exulted at his death, and went so far as to publicly read and then publish a pamphlet in which he violently attacks Rusticus and even calls him "the Stoics' ape," adding that "he is marked with the brand of Vitellius." * You recognise, of course, the Regulian style! He tears to pieces Herennius Senecio so savagely that Metius Carus said to him, "What have you to do with my dead men? Did I ever worry your Crassus or Camerinus?" - these being some of Regulus's victims in the days of Nero. Regulus thought I bore him malice for this, and so he did not invite me when he read his pamphlet. Besides, he remembered that he once mortally attacked me in the court of the centumviri. ** I was a witness on behalf of Arionilla, the wife of Timon, at the request of Rusticus Arulenus, and Regulus was conducting the prosecution. We on our side were relying for part of the defence on a decision of Metius Modestus, an excellent man who had been banished by Domitian and was at that moment in exile. This was Regulus's opportunity. "Tell me, Secundus," said he, "what you think of Modestus." You see in what peril I should have placed myself if I had answered that I thought highly of him, and how disgraceful it would have been if I had said that I thought ill of him. I fancy it must have been the gods who came to my rescue. "I will tell you what I think of him," I said, "when the Court has to give a decision on the point." He returned to the charge: "My question is, what do you think of Modestus?" Again I replied: "Witnesses used to be interrogated about persons in the dock, not about those who are already convicted." A third time he asked: "Well, I won't ask you now what you think of Modestus, but what you think of his loyalty." "You ask me," said I, "for my opinion. But I do not think it is in order for you to ask an opinion on what the Court has already passed judgment." He was silenced, while I was congratulated and praised for not having smirched my reputation by giving an answer that might have been discreet but would certainly have been dishonest, and for not having entangled myself in the meshes of such a crafty question. Well, now the fellow is conscience-stricken, and buttonholes first Caecilius Celer and then implores Fabius Justus to reconcile me to him. Not content with that, he makes his way in to see Spurinna, and begs and prays of him - you know what an abject coward he is when he is frightened - as follows. "Do go," says he, "and call on Pliny in the morning - early in the morning, for my suspense is unbearable - and do what you can to remove his anger against me." I was early awake that day, when a message came from Spurinna, "I am coming to see you." I sent back word, "I will come and see you." We met at the portico of Livia, just as we were each of us on the way to see the other. He explained his commission from Regulus and added his own entreaties, but did not press the point too strongly, as became a worthy gentleman asking a favour for a worthless acquaintance. This was my answer: "Well, you must see for yourself what message you think best to take back to Regulus; I should not like you to be under any misapprehension. I am waiting till Mauricus † returns" - he had not yet returned from exile - "and so I cannot give you an answer either way, for I shall do just what he thinks best. It is he who is principally interested in this matter, I am only secondarily concerned." A few days afterwards Regulus himself met me when I was paying my respects to the new praetor. He followed me thither and asked for a private conversation. He said he was afraid that something he once said in the court of the centumviri rankled in my memory, when, in replying to Satrius Rufus and myself, he remarked, "Satrius Rufus, who is quite content with the eloquence of our days, and does not seek to rival Cicero." I told him that as I had his own confession for it I could now see that the remark was a spiteful one, but that it was quite possible to put a complimentary construction upon it. "For," said I, "I do try to rival Cicero, and I am not content with the eloquence of our own time. I think it is very stupid not to take as models the very best masters. But how is it that you remember this case and forget the other one in which you asked me what I thought of the loyalty of Metius Modestus?" As you know, he is always pale, but he grew perceptibly paler at this thrust. Then he stammered out, "I put the question not to damage you but Modestus." Observe the man's malignant nature who does not mind acknowledging that he wished to do an injury to an exile. Then he went on to make this fine excuse; "He wrote in a letter which was read aloud in Domitian's presence, 'Regulus is the vilest creature that walks on two legs.'" Modestus never wrote a truer word. That practically closed the conversation. I did not wish it to go any further, so that I might not commit myself until Mauricus arrived. Moreover, I am quite aware that Regulus is a difficult bird to net. He is rich, he is a shrewd intriguer, he has no inconsiderable body of followers and a still larger circle of those who fear him, and fear is often a more powerful factor than affection. But, after all, these are bonds that may be shattered and weakened, for a bad man's influence is as little to be relied upon as is the man himself. Moreover, let me repeat that I am waiting for Mauricus. He is a man of sound judgment and sagacity, which he has learned by experience, and he can gauge what is likely to happen in the future from what has occurred in the past. I shall be guided by him, and either strike a blow or set aside my weapons just as he thinks best. I have written you this letter because it is only right, considering our regard for one another, that you should be acquainted not only with what I have said and done, but also with my plans for the future. Farewell. (*) This refers to a wound he had received while supporting Vitellius. - Tacitus, Hist. iii. 80. (**) A college of about one hundred judges, as the name implies, divided into Chambers or Courts. It will be found frequently mentioned in these letters. (†) The brother of Arulenus Rusticus.

C. PLINIUS VOCONIO ROMANO SUO S. Vidistine quemquam M. Regulo timidiorem humiliorem post Domitiani mortem? Sub quo non minora flagitia commiserat quam sub Nerone sed tectiora. Coepit vereri ne sibi irascerer, nec fallebatur: irascebar. Rustici Aruleni periculum foverat, exsultaverat morte; adeo ut librum recitaret publicaretque, in quo Rusticum insectatur atque etiam 'Stoicorum simiam' appellat, adicit 'Vitelliana cicatrice stigmosum' — agnoscis eloquentiam Reguli -, lacerat Herennium Senecionem tam intemperanter quidem, ut dixerit ei Mettius Carus 'Quid tibi cum meis mortuis? Numquid ego Crasso aut Camerino molestus sum?' quos ille sub Nerone accusaverat. Haec me Regulus dolenter tulisse credebat, ideoque etiam cum recitaret librum non adhibuerat. Praeterea reminiscebatur, quam capitaliter ipsum me apud centumviros lacessisset. Aderam Arrionillae Timonis uxori, rogatu Aruleni Rustici; Regulus contra. Nitebamur nos in parte causae sententia Metti Modesti optimi viri: is tunc in exsilio erat, a Domitiano relegatus. Ecce tibi Regulus 'Quaero,' inquit, 'Secunde, quid de Modesto sentias.' Vides quod periculum, si respondissem 'bene'; quod flagitium si 'male'. Non possum dicere aliud tunc mihi quam deos adfuisse. 'Respondebo' inquam 'si de hoc centumviri iudicaturi sunt.' Rursus ille: 'Quaero, quid de Modesto sentias.' Iterum ego: 'Solebant testes in reos, non in damnatos interrogari.' Tertio ille: 'Non iam quid de Modesto, sed quid de pietate Modesti sentias quaero. 'Quaeris' inquam 'quid sentiam; at ego ne interrogare quidem fas puto, de quo pronuntiatum est.' Conticuit; me laus et gratulatio secuta est, quod nec famam meam aliquo responso utili fortasse, inhonesto tamen laeseram, nec me laqueis tam insidiosae interrogationis involveram. Nunc ergo conscientia exterritus apprehendit Caecilium Celerem, mox Fabium Iustum; rogat ut me sibi reconcilient. Nec contentus pervenit ad Spurinnam; huic suppliciter, ut est cum timet abiectissimus: 'Rogo mane videas Plinium domi, sed plane mane — neque enim ferre diutius sollicitudinem possum -, et quoquo modo efficias, ne mihi irascatur.' Evigilaveram; nuntius a Spurinna: 'Venio ad te.' 'Immo ego ad te.' Coimus in porticum Liviae, cum alter ad alterum tenderemus. Exponit Reguli mandata, addit preces suas, ut decebat optimum virum pro dissimillimo, parce. Cui ego: 'Dispicies ipse quid renuntiandum Regulo putes. Te decipi a me non oportet. Exspecto Mauricum' — nondum ab exsilio venerat -: 'ideo nihil alterutram in partem respondere tibi possum, facturus quidquid ille decreverit; illum enim esse huius consilii ducem, me comitem decet.' Paucos post dies ipse me Regulus convenit in praetoris officio; illuc persecutus secretum petit; ait timere se ne animo meo penitus haereret, quod in centumvirali iudicio aliquando dixisset, cum responderet mihi et Satrio Rufo: 'Satrius Rufus, cui non est cum Cicerone aemulatio et qui contentus est eloquentia saeculi nostri'. Respondi nunc me intellegere maligne dictum quia ipse confiteretur, ceterum potuisse honorificum existimari. 'Est enim' inquam 'mihi cum Cicerone aemulatio, nec sum contentus eloquentia saeculi nostri; nam stultissimum credo ad imitandum non optima quaeque proponere. Sed tu qui huius iudicii meministi, cur illius oblitus es, in quo me interrogasti, quid de Metti Modesti pietate sentirem?' Expalluit notabiliter, quamvis palleat semper, et haesitabundus: 'Interrogavi non ut tibi nocerem, sed ut Modesto.' Vide hominis crudelitatem, qui se non dissimulet exsuli nocere voluisse. Subiunxit egregiam causam: 'Scripsit' inquit 'in epistula quadam, quae apud Domitianum recitata est: "Regulus, omnium bipedum nequissimus"'; quod quidem Modestus verissime scripserat. Hic fere nobis sermonis terminus; neque enim volui progredi longius, ut mihi omnia libera servarem dum Mauricus venit. Nec me praeterit esse Regulum 'dyskathaireton'; est enim locuples factiosus, curatur a multis, timetur a pluribus, quod plerumque fortius amore est. Potest tamen fieri ut haec concussa labantur; nam gratia malorum tam infida est quam ipsi. Verum, ut idem saepius dicam, exspecto Mauricum. Vir est gravis prudens, multis experimentis eruditus et qui futura possit ex praeteritis providere. Mihi et temptandi aliquid et quiescendi illo auctore ratio constabit. Haec tibi scripsi, quia aequum erat te pro amore mutuo non solum omnia mea facta dictaque, verum etiam consilia cognoscere. Vale.